An Analytic Comparison of Two Debates on Fanon versus Canon
An Analytic Comparison of Two Debates on Fanon versus Canon
Angela Boyd
There have been quite a few debates between fans and fandoms that have grown so big that they spill over into the general public, debates that seem to rip the fandoms apart and draw clear divides between fans. Team Edward vs Team Jacob in Twilight or the Shipping Wars of Harry Potter, or even whether or not something is Canon vs Fanon. Some literature on the topic of Fans and Fandoms claim that these debates are far more negative and competitive than they are positive and co-operative. The goal of this paper is to determine whether debates among fandoms and fans were primarily negative or positive by analyzing two debates on the same topic of Canon vs Fanon in two separate fan communities on the website Reddit. The analysis used the types of arguments being presented, the type of argumentation, pragmatic ambiguity and the affective stance. Subsequently my findings show that the discourse between fans is largely positive and co-operative by sharing knowledge and expertise of the specific fandoms in question.
4 Comments »
Leave a comment
-
Archives
- April 2024 (23)
- April 2022 (20)
- April 2021 (14)
- April 2020 (22)
- April 2019 (15)
- April 2018 (15)
- April 2017 (25)
- April 2016 (22)
- April 2015 (30)
- April 2014 (19)
- April 2013 (23)
- April 2012 (15)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
Language and Societies 
I wonder what properties would be necessary to have a negative debate? Are debates, by definition, ‘positive,’ in that they are productive and require that information is shared between opposing authors? If the discourse is not cooperative to some degree, would it even be a debate? This epistemological question about your (and others’) initial question aside, I also wonder if the Fanon vs Canon debate inherently results in a more cooperative or ‘positive’ discussion compared to the other debates you mentioned; in these other examples, choosing a side in the debate implies one would disparage a particular character in aligning themselves with the other. However, in the fanon vs canon debate, participating only indicates a person is a fan of the media in question, regardless of which “side” of the debate they are on, without necessarily disparaging a character that’s beloved by others.
I wonder what properties would be necessary to have a negative debate? Are debates, by definition, ‘positive,’ in that they are productive and require that information is shared between opposing authors? If the discourse is not cooperative to some degree, would it even be a debate? This epistemological question about your (and others’) initial question aside, I also wonder if the Fanon vs Canon debate inherently results in a more cooperative or ‘positive’ discussion compared to the other debates you mentioned; in these other examples, choosing a side in the debate implies one would disparage a particular character in aligning themselves with the other. However, in the fanon vs canon debate, participating only indicates a person is a fan of the media in question, regardless of which “side” of the debate they are on, without necessarily disparaging a character that’s beloved by others.
Fandom interactions are an extremely interesting topic and I am no stranger to how heated some debates can get if someone disagrees with your opinion! What two fandoms did you look at for this paper? Were a lot of the arguments presented based on canon events or did it seem like it was more based on personal opinion of the Redditors that were posting and responding? I would love to hear more about what you found out during your research!
Hello. I used the Harry Potter Fandom and the Attack on Titan fandom. It seemed to me that the arguments were more based on facts from the canon than on personal beliefs. In fact I didn’t really see any posts in the data set I used that were based primarily on personal opinion.